^'b 



e-Tmon 



cielvverei atth, 



Teaue^t ^f the. ATiti-slavery 



oc-iei 



'/ 



-f Tl 



OTW \ C 



h & 



VlClTll 



7 



3uly ^tk, l^'5^,by 



ia.*mes 



T^.Tiiok'vTiscTi. 




aass_&jm. 
Book J) 56 



•:> . 



A SERmOM, 



DELIVERED IN THE 



/?¥ 



SECOND CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, NORWICH, 



On the fourth of July, 1834, 



AT THE REaOEST OF THE 



ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY OF NORWICH &, VICINITY. 



BY JAMES T. DICKINSON, 

Pastor of the Second Congregational Church. 




NORWICH: 

PUBLISHED BY THE ANTI-SLAVERY BOCIETY. 



1834. 



SERMON 



Provehbs, xxxi. 9. 
» Open thy moulh, judge rigliteously, and plead tbe cause of the poor 
and needy." 

ECCLESIASTES, iv. 1. 

« So I returned and considered all the oppressions that are done under 
tlie sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no 
comlbrter; and on the side of tiie oppressers there was power; but they 
had no comforter." 

Jeremiah, xxii. 3. 
" Thus saith the Lord : Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and 
deliver the spoiled out ot the hand of the opi)iessor : and do no wrong." 



The Bible speaks with great frequency, and in terms of un- 
measured severity, of the sin of oppression. Take as a specimen 
such laniiuage as the following : JVo unto them that decree tin- 
righteous' decrees, and that write ffrievousness lokich they have 
prescribed ; to turn aside the needy from judgment, and to take 
away the right from the poor of my people. Rob not the poor, 
because he is poor : neither oppress the afflicted in the gate : for 
the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that 
spoiled them. Jehovah represents himself as taking the part of 
the oppressed : For the oppression of the poor, for, the sighing 
of the needy, will I arise, saith the Lord. The Lord cxecutetk 
ri'^hteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed. He shall 
scive the children of the needy, and shall break m pieces the op- 
pressor. Any one who has never examined the Ilihie with refer- 
ence to this subject, will be surprised to find how much it con- 
tains respecting oppression. Passages without number might be 
quoted, similar to those already cited. It may be considered, 
then, a point setUed, that God frowns upon oppression, and con- 
siders the oppressor as a sinner. 



4 

That modern slave-holding is oppression, and oppression too of 
the worst kind, is another point that can be established with equal 
certainty. Individuals there indeed are, that are caUed slave- 
holders, who render to their servants " that which is just and 
equal." But these are slave-holders only in name. When we 
speak of slave-holding, we mean that system which claims the 
right of buying and selling human beings, of tearing asunder fami- 
lies, of withholding wages, of shutting out instruction, and conse- 
quently the Bible. This system we say is a system of oppres- 
sion, and therefore is regarded by the Bible as sin. Those per- 
sons who are nominally slave-holders, but who do not claim the 
right o{ property in their servants, nor withhold from them a rea- 
sonable compensation for their labor, nor deny them instruction 
and the Bible, are not slave-holders in fact, whatever they may 
be in form or name. When we speak of slave-holders, we do 
not mean thrm. We however believe the number of this class of 
persons in our country to be small ; for if the number were con- 
siderable, we should sec their petitions going up to the legislatmes 
of the several States for the repeal of oppressive laws : we should 
see them uniting their efforts, and doing all in their power to put 
an end to the system of slavery. But we see no such thing. It 
is evident that a majority of our countrymen, at least, are willing 
that the oppression should continue ; for its continuance depends 
only upon the will of the majority. Let the will of the majority 
be changed, and slavery will cease. What we propose to do is, 
to act upon this will until it is changed. 

I stand before you, my friends, lo-day, as the appointed organ 
of the Anti-Slavery Society of Norwich and vicinity, to explain 
and vindicate its doctrines and plans. But we shall be asked at 
once, Why preach on this subject at the North ? why form an 
anti-slavery society in Norwich, when there are no slaves here } 
True, there are no slaves in Norwich, but there are men in Nor- 
wich who, in conjunction with their countrymen, hold slaves in the 
Disuict of Columbia, and in the Territories of Arkansas and Flo- 
rida. The citizens of Norwich are just as much responsible for 
the continuance of slavery in the District of Columbia and the 
United States Territories, as the citizens of South Carolina are 
for the contiiuiancc of slavery in that State. The free Stales, be- 
ing the majority, have the power and the right to set at liberty 
twenty-six thousand slaves. Every person who does not i)ctition 
Congress on this subject, and exert his whole influence to procure 
the liberation of these twenty-six thousand, participates in the 
guilt of slave-holding. Every person who holds sentiments in re- 
lation to slavery, which, d" hold by all, would allow Congress to 
remain inactive, and thus keep in boii(la2;o these twenty-six thou- 
sand huujan beings, is chargeable uilli sin. Every person whoso 



sentiments in regard to slavery arc correct, but who docs not ex- 
ert his influence to extend those sentiments, is also chargeable 
with sin. There is need, then, of an anti-slavery society among 
us. We need such a society to correct and embody public sen- 
timent, and cause it to bear against this sin. The opinion prevails 
here, that we have no right to meddle with this subject. This 
opinion is entirely wrong, and must be corrected. We not only 
have a right to meddle with it, but it is our positive duty, and we 
commit sin if we do not meddle with it ; for so long as we refuse 
to act on this subject, we are holding our fellow-creatures in bon- 
dage, by contributing our influence to the upholding of that pub- 
lic sentiment which upholds the system of slavery. But besides 
our obligations to the twenty-six thousand slaves referred to, we 
have duties to perform to our Southern brethren in relation to this 
subject. We are bound to show them their duty. The opinion 
has been almost universal in the free States, that we have no right 
to interfere uith slavery at the South. If by interference it be 
meant that we have no right to instigate the slaves to rebellion, or 
that Congress has no right to nullify the laws of any of the States, 
we most fully grant that such interference would be wrong. Hut 
who has ever dreamed of such interference as this ? Abolitionists 
have not. They have always distinctly disclaimed such inten- 
tions. If by interference, it be meant that we have no right to 
preach or publish the truth to our Southern brethren, then we say 
the opinion is wrong. It is not only our right, but our duty, to 
point out to them the sin of slave-holding, just as it is our duty to 
show to the Chinese, the Hindoo, and the Sandwich Islander, the 
sin of idolatry. Our duty to the people of the South is in some 
respects more imperative than our duty to the people of other 
lands. They are our countrymen ; and they are cherishing a sin 
which is bringing disgrace upon our country in the eyes of the 
whole world, and which threatens to ^raw down upon us the ven- 
geance of the God of the oppressed. When, therefore, we see 
them buying and selling their fellow men, separating husbands 
from wives, and parents from children ; when we see them enact- 
ing laws which forbid their instruction, and thus shutting them out 
from the Bible, we are bound to tell them that such things arc 
sinful, and that they ought to repent. Will it be ol)jecied that we 
have never lived at the South, and are not so well qualified to 
judge of the guilt of slavery as those who are on the spot ; and 
that consequently we had better leave the work of reformation to 
those who are best acquainted with the sin ? It is true we are 
not so well acquainted with the sin as they are; anil/o/* that venj 
reason we think we are better qualified to expose it and put it 
down. Is not the man who drinks only water the best person to 
expose the evils of drunkenness, and rrioderaie diinking, imd rum- 



selling ? iNTust he establish a dram-shop, and watch the operation 
of the business, before he can tell whether it is sinful ? INlust he 
become a drunkard himself, before he can know the evils of 
drinking ? Obviously, the more temperate he is, the better qual- 
ified lie is to be a temperance reformer. The same rule holds 
true in regard to all other sins. The less we know of sin practi- 
cally, the better qualified we are to put down sin. Who are the 
best men to put down the theatre and the gaming house ? Plain- 
ly, not the men who frequent the theatre— not the men who are 
found in the gaming house. Who, then, are the best men to ex- 
pose the sin of slavery ? Those certainly who are the least ac- 
quainted with it. We at the North, therefore, are better qualified 
than the people of the South to commence and carry forward this 
reformation. We are at least bound to liberate our own slaves in 
the District of Columbia and the Territories, and to reason with 
all our countrymen until we persuade Uiem to liberate theirs. 

We proceed now to set forth what we believe to be the true 
doctrine in regard to slavery. Our doctrine is, that all slave- 
holdinq is sni— meaning by slave-holding, the claiming and exer- 
cising of the right of property in man, of buying and selling human 
beinjs, of separating famihes, of withholding the Bible, and of re- 
fusing compensation for services. Those who deny the sinfulness 
of slove-holdinii, are always careful to give such a definition ol 
slavery as to include those few persons who are only »om/7io/slave- 
hx)lders. They make their definition loose and indefinite, as it 
for the very purpose of palliating the sin. I have read with griet 
the apologies for slave-holding, in the form of loose definitions, 
which have been spread before the community by some ot our 
best men, and by our most respectable religious periodicals. iHo 
Christian Spectator, in an article on slavery, uses the following 
lan-ua-e : " It is necessary to define distinctly the subject in de- 
bate, vtz. Whatisslavcnj? .Before attempting a direct answer 
to this (lucstion, it is to be remarked that there are many varieties 
of slavery ; that the laws of dillVrent countries and ages limit and 
modify the relations of master and slave, in many dillerent de- 
grees ; and that therefore the answer ought to include slavery m 
nil its forms."' But we wouUl ask, what have we to do with slax e- 
rv in other countries, and other ages? The inquiry respects 
slavery in our own country. When the friends ol temperance in- 
stitute an iiumiry into the cdects of ardent spirits as used m our 
coMMlry, they do not consider it necessary to extend the inquiry 
to wine and opium, and every other thing ol the kind, which has 
been use.l in all countries and in all ages. Why then attempt to 
include cvrrv species of servitude in a (lel.niii..n ol American 
slavery ? liul let us hear the definition which the Spectator final- 
ly gives of slaverv. " ll is an artificial relation, or civil constitu- 



tion bv which one man is invested with property in the labor ot 
anoiier, to whom, bv virtue of that relation, he owes the duties 
of protection, support and government, and who owes him m re- 
turn obedience and submisdon." This definition, it will be seen, 
includes apprenticeship, as well as slavery. The master is mvest- 
ed with property in the labor of his apprentice, as really as the 
slave-holder is in the labor of his slave. With such a dehnition, 
it is not strange that the writer should be able to show that slave- 
holding does not necessarily imply guilt, and that immediate eman- 
cipation is not necessarily a duty. , T^ i 

The American Quarterly Observer, in an article on the Declara- 
tion of American Independence, advances similar sentiments. 
The writer no where gives a formal definition of slavery, but the 
following passage will convey some idea of his views on this sub- 
ject : " Slavery is not a malum in se, but a malum per coiisequen- 
tia ; not possessing in itself any moral quality whatsoever, but ta- 
king its moral hue from the accompanying circumstances, from the 
various physical relations of the parties to one another, and the 
motives, feelings and views of the masters in retaining their slaves 
in bondage," Allowing this doctrine to be correct, we might with 
equal propriety say that rum-selling in itself considered has no 
moral quality whatever. When sold for piedical purposes, or lor 
any purpose except as a drink for persons in health, it is an en- 
tirely innocent business. And yet if we open one of the reports 
of the American Temperance Society, we read that " between 
the traffick in ardent spirits and a profession of the Christian re- 
ligion there is a total hostility:' We turn to another page, and 
read that over the places where rum is sold should be written, 
« The way to hell, going down to the chambers of death:' We 
read on, and come to this assertion, " Distillers, retailers and 
drunkards are culprits in the eyes of all sober men:' Now we 
ask, why do not those who denounce abolitionists for calling slave- 
holding a sin, arraign the American Temperance Society for using 
such unqualified language in respect to the traffick in ardent spir- 
its, when it is known that there are men who sell ardent spir- 
its from good motives ? When we attack any sia, we attack some 
form of it that is known to exist, and we use language that is ge- 
neral. When we attack rum-selling, we mean rum-selling as it is 
commonly practised, without stopping to make the exceptions. 
When we attack slave-holding, we mean such slave-holding as is 
common in our country. If any persons are slave-holders only in 
name, and we suppose there are a few such, let it be understood 
that we have no controversy with them. 

We come now to the question, What is slavery ? and we wish 
for a definition that shall not be abstract, but applicable to the case 
under consideration, viz. slavery, as it exists at the present day m 



8 

our own country. Let us go then to the slave laws and to facts, 
to learn what slavery is, and then we will make out our definition. 
And let it be here observed, that in a country like ours, where 
the laws depend upon the will of the majority, and where elections 
are annual, it is a fair presumption that the laws express the deci- 
ded sentiment of a majority of the people. And since tlie laws are 
sanctioned by the practice and silent consent of many of those who 
arc said to be unfriendly to the system of slavery, but who make 
no efforts to procure a change of these laws, we may conclude 
that not only a majority, but the great body of the people, are 
willing that they should remain as they are. The slave laws, 
then, may be considered as containing the embodied sentiments 
of the nation in regard to slavery. Let us examine some of the 
provisions of these laws. 

In the first place, the laws of all the slave-holding States regard 
slaves, not as human beings, hut as things, or beasts ; not as the 
owners of their oicn bodies and soids, but as the property of their 
masters. One or two quotations will be suflicient to illustrate tliis 
point. The law of South Carolina is as follows : " Slaves shall bo 
deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged, in law, to be chattels 
personal m the hands of their owners or possessors, and their ex- 
ecutors, administrators and assigns, to all intents, constructions, 
and purposes whatsoever." According to the civil code of Lou- 
isiana, " A slave is one who is in the power of the master to whom 
he belongs. The master may sell him, dispose of his person, his 
industry, and his labor: he can do nothing, possess nothing, nor 
acquire any thing, but what must belong to his master." 

Again, the slave is entirely subject to the will of the master, and 
■may be punished by him even with death. The laws in relation to 
the protection of the life of the slave are so peculiar that they de- 
serve especial consideration. If we read only one clause of a 
statute, wc should conclude that the protection of the slave is in- 
tended ; but if we read on, we find some exception or provision 
which entirely nullifies the law, and leaves the slave at the mercy 
of the master or overseer. An act of North Carolina, passed in 
17'J8, reads thus: "Whereas by another act of assembly, passed 
in the year 1774, the killing of a slave, however wanton, cruel 
and deliberate, is only punishable in the first instance by imprison- 
ment and paying the value thereof to the owner, which distinction 
of criminality butween the murder of a white jicrson and one who 
is cMjualiy a human creature, but merely of a dillerent complexion, 
is disgraceful to humanity, and degrading in the highest degree to 

* Tiling (liiolatioiis (ronillic ulavc laws, anil most ofthoBcthat follow, arc 
irorn "Slrou.l's Sliivc Luwrf." The references to tlii.s and to other uulhor- 
iiies quoicil in dillerent purls ol the diacoursc, arc for the sake of convcn- 
icuce omitted. 



the laws and principles of a free, Christian and enlightened conn- 
try, Be it enacted, he. That if any person siiall hereafter be guilty 
of wilfully and maliciously killing a slave, such ofiunder shall, up- 
on the first conviction thereof, be adjudged guilty of murder, and 
shall suffer the same punishment as if he had killed a iree man : 
Provided always, this act shall not extend to the person killing a 
slave outlawed by virtue of any act of assembly of this State, or to 
any slave in the act of resistance to his lauful owner or master, or 
to any slave dying under moderate correction.'''' The law of 
Georgia is substantially the same. Now when we take into con- 
sideration this law, and all the circumstances connected with it, 
it appears to be the very height of cruelty. It allows the murder 
of an outlawed slave — and when is a slave an outlaw ? "A pro- 
clamation of outlawry against a slave is authorised, whenever he 
runs away from his master, conceals himself in some obscure re- 
treat, and to sustain life, kills a hog, or some animal of the cattle 
kind I ! " The meaning of the clause which speaks of resistance 
may be known from a reported case, in which it has been "judi- 
cially determined that it is justifiable to kill a slave resisting or of- 
fering to resist his master by force." The absurdity of styling 
that correction " moderate " which causes death, is too gross to 
need comment. Here then is a law, which, while it speaks of its 
being "disgraceful to humanhy" to abuse a slave because he has a 
" different complexion," directly after gives license to murder 
him whenever the slave offers to resist, or whenever the master or 
overseer chooses to resort to moderate correction. 

But there is another law common to all the slave States, which 
effectually excludes the slave from the protection of law, and 
leaves him at the mercy, not of the master merely, but of all other 
white men. I refer to the law which excludes the colored man 
from giving testimony against the white man. Any white man 
can abuse or kill any number of slaves or free colored men, and 
provided no white man is present as a witness, he cannot be con- 
victed. This law exposes the whole colored race to the abuse of 
any and of every white man, and particularly of that class of men 
whom Mr. Wirt styles the "last and lowest, afeculnm of beings, 
called overseers — the most iJjject, degraded, unprincipled race — 
always cap in hand to the dons who employ them, and furnishing 
materials ibr the exercise of their pride, insolence, and spirit of 
domination." 

Again, the slave laios are such as almost entirely to destroy the 
institution of marriage, and to produce general licentiousness. I 
quote as proof the testimony of the Rev. Mr. Paxton, a friend of 
the Colonization Society, and formerly a slave-holder : " Some 
slaves have indeed a marriage ceremony performed. It is how- 
2 



10, 

ever usually done by one of their own color, and of course is not a 
legal transaction. And if done by a person legally authorised to 
perform marriages, still it would have no authority, because the law 
does not recognise marriage among slaves, so as to clothe it with 
the rights and immunities wiiich it lias among citizens. The own- 
er of either party might the next day or hour break up the con- 
nection, in any way lie pleased. In fact, these connections have 
no protection, and are so often broken up by sales and transfers and 
removals, that they are by ihe slaves often called taking up to- 
g-ether. The sense of marriage fidelity must be greatly weakened, 
if not wholly destroyed, by such a state of things. The effect is 
most disastrous." Mr. Paxton then goes on to give the details of 
this disastrous effect, both upon the slaves and upon the white pop- 
ulation ; but I will not give you pain by presenting the disgusting 
picture. A system better fitted to produce licentiousness could not 
be devised, than the slave system. 

Again, the slave laws forbid the teaching of slaves to read or 
write, and thus preclude their instruction in the Scriptures. Laws 
against the instruction of slaves were enacted as early as 1740, and 
these laws have been growing more and more severe ever since. 
The revised code of Virginia contains an enactment which de- 
clares that " any school or schools for teaching them, [i. e. all ne- 
groes, or mulatioes, whether bond or free] reading or writing, ei- 
ther in the day or night, under whatsoever pretext, shall be deem- 
ed and considered an unlawfiil assembly." In North Carolina, 
" to teach a slave to read or write, or to sell or give him any book 
or pamphlet, is punished with sixty-nine lashes, or with imprison- 
ment at the discretion of the court, if the offender be a free negro; 
and with a fine of two hundred dollars, if a white." The reason 
set forth in this law is, that " teaching slaves to read and write 
tends to excite dissatisfaction in ihcir minds, and to produce insur- 
rection and rebellion." The laws of the other slave States are si- 
milar. In Louisiana, an act has been passed within a few years 
of more than ordinary severity. The words of the statute are as 
follows : " If any person in Louisiana, from the bar, bench, stage, 
pulpit, or any other place, or in conversation, shall make use of 
any language, signs or actions, having a tendency to produce dis- 
content among the free colored people, or insubordination among 
the slaves, such person shall be punished with inii)risonment from 
three to twenty-one years, or with death at the discretion of the 
court." According to this law, the reading of the r)Sth chapter 
of Isaiah, when any colored person should be present, would be 
punishable with death ; for surely that chapter would have a ten- 
dency to produce discontent in the minds of the oppressed. 

1 might go on (jnoting these oppressive laws for hours, but your 
patience must not be abused. After what I consider a faithful ex- 



11 

amination of this part of the subject, I have come to the conclusion 
that the laws afford no protection to the slave that is worth nam- 
ing ; and not only so, they require the slave-holder to be an op- 
pressor, and consequently to break the laws of God. According 
to law, the slave can have no property, no wife^ no children, no 
Bible. And what is this but making a man a heathen by statute ? 
Forbid a man to hold property, and you make him a thief. Take 
away his wife and children and break up the marriage institution, 
and you make him licentious. Withhold from him the Bible, and 
you complete the whole work of degradation, and he is altogether 
a heathen. 

We have thus seen what slavery is, according to law, and have 
said that if the laws were obeyed, they would make the slaves 
heathen. Let us now see whether they are not heathen in fact. 
On this point I will present some extracts from an essay prepared 
during the last year, under the direction of the Presbytery of 
Georgia, by the Rev. C. C. Jones, of Liberty county. Mr. Jones, 
having under his pastoral charge six thousand slaves, has taken 
special pains to investigate their moral and religious condition ; 
and this fact, in connection with the excellence of his character, 
gives to his testimony great weight. In reply to the question, 
" Has the negro access to the Scriptures?" he says, "The stat- 
utes of our respective States forbid it, or when through some over- 
sight ihey do not, custom does. On the one hand he cannot be a 
hearer of the law, for oral instruction is but sparingly afforded him ; 
and on the other hand, he cannot search the Scriptures, for a 
knowledge of letters he has not, and cannot legally obtain." In 
regard to this oral instruction, of which Mr. Jones speaks, and of 
which our Southern brethren generally are beginning to speak, let 
it here be remarked, that it will not do to shut out the Bible from 
the slave. What is the great sin of the Romish church? It is 
that she will not give the Bible to the common people. This was 
the grand error which Luther exposed. And now, in this day of 
light, when we have voted that we will give the Bible to the whole 
world, shall we withhold it from our own countrymen, and pretend 
that they do not need it ! Let us hear Mr. Jones farther : " It is 
a solemn fact which we must not conceal, that their private and 
public religious instruction forms no part of the aim of owners ge- 
nerally. There is no anxiety, no effort made to obtain such in- 
struction. The great, the absorbing aim is, to work them profita- 
bly. They are shut out from our sympathies and efforts as im- 
mortal beings, and are educated and disciplined as creatures of 
profit, and of profit only, for this world." We sometimes hear it 
said, that large numbers of slaves are members of churches, and 
it is true that many of them do belong to the church ; but on this 
point Mr. Jones observes, " The number of professors of religion 



12 

[among the slaves] is small, that can present a correct view of the 
plan of salvation. True religion they are greatly inclined to place 
in profession, in formsjin ordinances ; and true conversion in dreams, 
visions, trances, and voices ; and these they otTer to church ses- 
sions as evidences of conversion. Sometimes principles of con- 
duct are adopted by church members, at so much variance with 
the gospel, that the grace of God is turned into Insciviousness. 
No man knows the extent of their ignorance on the subject of re- 
ligion, until he for himself makes special investigation. They be- 
lieve in second sight, in apparitions, in charms, in witchcraft, in a 
kind of irresistible Satanic influence. The superstitions that were 
brought with them from Africa, have never fully been laid aside." 
In regard to the great mass who make no pretensions to religion, 
Mr. Jones says that their notions of God and of a future state are 
confused, and that " some are ignorant of the name itself of the 
exalted Saviour. The jNIohammedan Africans who remain of the 
old stock of importations, though accustomed to hear the gospel 
preached, have been known to accommodate Christianity to Mo- 
hammedanism. God, say they, is Allah, and Jesus Christ is Mo- 
hammed ; the religion is the same, but different countries have 
different names." 

Mr. Jones gives a dark picture of the vices of slaves. Polyga- 
my is common among them. " Little or no aacredness is attach- 
ed to the marriage contract. It is viewed as a contract of con- 
venience, that may he entered into and dissolved at any time. 
They generally unite without ceremony. Nothing is more com- 
mon than the dissolution of marriage ties ; and instances of con- 
jugal fidelity for a long course of years are exceedingly rare. 
Chastity in either sex is an exceedingly rare virtue. Such is the 
universality and greatness of the vice of lewdness, that to those 
who are acquainted with slave countries, not a word need be said. 
All the consequences of this vice are to be seen, not excepting in- 
fanticide itself." We further learn from the statements of Mr. 
Jones, that the slaves are proverbially thieves, that their word can- 
not be depended upon at all, and that they break the Sabbath al- 
most universally, giving as an excuse, that they have no other 
time to work for themselves. 

The Rev. ■Mr. Converse, of Burlington, Vermont, w ho was at 
one period an nirent of the Colonization Society, and resided for 
some lime in Virginia, states in a discourse before the Vermont 
Colonization Society, that " almost nothing is done to instruct the 
slaves in the principles and duties of the Christian religion. The 
laws of the South strictly forbid their being taught to read ; and 
ihcy make no provision for their being ora'ly instructed. Minis- 
ters soineiiuies [)re:ii-h to them under p«>cnliar and severe restric- 
tions of the law. But with all that has yet been done, the major- 



13 

ity are emphatically heathens, and what is very strange, heathens 
in the midst of a land ol Sabbaths, and of churches, of Bibles, and 
of Christians. . . . Pious niaslers (with some honorable ex- 
ceptions) are criminally negligent of giving religious instruction to 
their slav^es. It has long been neglected, and masters have fallen 
into a deep sleep in reference to this matter. They can and do 
instruct their own children, and perhaps their house servants; 
while those called ' field hands' live and labor, and die without 
being once told by their pious masters tliat Jesus Christ died to 
save sinners, [ndecd, this is a most ungrateful task to the master. 
He is so much accustomed to speak to them in the rough tone of 
sternness and authority, that it requires an effort most revolting to 
his feelings, to assume the kind and gentle accents of a Christian 
teacher." 

A Writer in the Western Luminary, a respectable religious pa- 
per in Lexington, Kentucky, says, " I proclaim it abroad to the 
Christian world, that heathenism is as real in the slave States as it 
is in the South Sea Islands, and that our negroes are as justly ob- 
jects of attention to the American and other boards of foreign mis- 
sions, as the Indians of the western wilds. What is it constitutes 
heathenism ? Is it to be destitute of a knowledge of God — of his 
holy word — never to have heard scarcely a sentence of it read 
through life — to know little or nothing of the history, character, 
instruction and mis^iion of Jesus Christ — to be almost totally de- 
void of moral knowledge and feeling, of sentiments of probity, 
truth and chastity ? If this constitutes heathenism, tiien are there 
thousands, millions of heathen in our own beloved land. There is 
one topic to which I will allude, which will serve to establish the 
heathenistn of this population. I allude to the universal licen- 
tiousness which prevails. It may be said emphatically that chast- 
ity is no virtue among them — that its violation neither injures fe- 
male character in their own estimation, or that of their master or 
mistress. No instruction is ever given — no censure pronounced. 
I speak not of the world ; I speak of Christian families generally." 

Much more testimony of this kind mijrht be adduced ; but this 
is sufllcient to establish the point that most of the slaves are as 
truly ignorant of the Christian religion as the heathen. We are 
now in some measure prepared for a definition of slavery. And 
lest my own language should appear too strong, I will first make use 
of a definition wliicli I find in the Ahican Repository, from the 
pen of the Rev. J. Breckenridge, of Baltimore. I shall quote 
the passage entire, just as it stands, with the exception of substi- 
tuting the word heathenism for a clause of a sentence which speaks 
of ignorance and the evils wliicii proceed from it: "What is 
slavery ?" says Mr. B. " We reply, it is that condition enforced 
by the laws of one half the States of this confederacy, in which 



14 

one portion of the community, called masters, is allowed such 
power over another portion, called slaves, as 1st, To deprive them 
of the entire earnings of their labor, except only so much as is 
necessary to continue labor itself, by continuing healthful exist- 
ence, thus committing clear robbery — 2d, To reduce them to the 
necessity of universal concubinage, by denying to them the rights 
of marriage ; thus breaking up the dearest relations of life, and 
encouraging universal prostitution — 3d, To deprive them of the 
means and opportunities of moral and intellectual culture, thus 
perpetuating heathenism — 4th, To set up between parents and 
their children an authority higher than the impulse of nature 
and the laws of God ; which breaks up the autliority of the fa- 
ther over his own offspring, and at pleasure separates the mother 
at a returnless distance from her child ; thus abrogating the 
dearest laws of nature ; thus outraging all decency and just- 
ice, and degrading and oppressing thousands upon thousands of 
beings created like themselves, in the image of the Most High 
God. This is slavery, as it is daily exhibited in every slave 
State." 

To put this definition into my own language, it would stand 
thus : Slavery is a system which, 1. Claims the right of property 
in man ; 2. Destroys the marriage contract among- slaves ; 3. 
Shuts out the Bible from them ; 4. Encourages and sustains the 
domestic slave-trade. That this definition of slavery is authorised 
by the references we have made to the slave laws, and by the 
testimony adduced respecting the actual condition of the slaves, 
we presume all will admit. Slavery, then, is morally wrong, and 
every one who holds his fellow man in such slavery as this, is a 
sinner. And now comes the unavoidable inference, that immedi- 
ately to repent of this ?in is a duty, or in other words, immediate 
emancipation is a duty. But from this position many of our 
countrymen start back. Let us then examine it. Take one of 
the points of our definition. Is it right to buy and sell men as 
merchandise or beasts ? Is it right to set up between parents and 
children an authority higher than that of the jiarent and the laws 
of God, and thus separate children from their mothers ? Would 
it be proper to cease from tearing mothers from their children, 
and wives from their husbands, gradually ? Ought not all laws 
which sanction and encourage such barbarity to be repealed im- 
mediately ? i. c. at the very next session ol each State legislature, 
for this is what the word immediately means as apjiiied to legis- 
lative acts. Ought not every slave-holder to cease from this day 
all acts which tear families asunder ? In other words, ought not 
the domestic slave-trade, in these United States, to cease at once ? 
It is computed by a friend of the Colonization Society, in an ap- 
pendix to Clarkson's History of Uie Abolition of tlie Slave-trade, 



15 

that more than 60,000 slaves are " annually bought and sold, and 
involuntarily transferred from one part to another of this/ree and 
happy country." The American Quarterly Review states that 
6,000 are sold and transported annually Irom Virginia alone, to 
the South and Southwest. Is this right ? Ought it not to cease 
immediately ? Shall we talk about the gradual abolition of such 
things as these ? Mr. Benton, an agent of the American Sunday 
School Union in Missouri, says, that while prosecuting his agen- 
cy, '•' he was applied to in more than a hundred instances by slaves 
who were about to be sold to southern drivers, beseeching him in 
the most earnest manner to buy them, so that they might not be 
driven away from their wives, their children, their brothers and 
their sisters. Knowing that his feelings were abhorrent to slavery, 
they addressed him without reserve, and with an entreaty border- 
ing on frenzy." " Curiosity," writes a gentleman in Charleston, 
to his friend in New York, " sometimes leads me to the auction 
sales of the negroes. A iew days since I attended one. The 
bodies of these wretched beings were placed upright upon a table — 
their physical proportions examined — their defects and beauties 
noted ! There I saw the father, looking with sullen contempt on 
the crowd, and expressing an indignation in his countenance which 
he dare not speak ; and the mother, pressing her infants closer to 
her bosom with an involuntary grasp, and exclaiming in wild and 
simple earnestness, while the tears chased down her cheeks in 
quick succession, ^ I cant leffmxj children — I wont leff my child- 
ren ! ! ' But on the hammer went, reckless alike whether it 
united or sundered forever. At another time (he proceeds) I saw 
the concluding scene of this infernal drama. It was on the wharf. 
A slave ship for New Orleans was lying in the stream, and the 
poor negroes, handcuffed and pinioned, were hurried off in boats, 
eight at a time. There I witnessed the last farewell — the heart- 
rending separation of every earthly tie — the mute and agonizing 
embrace of the husband and wife, and the convulsive grasp of the 
mother and child, who were alike torn asunder forever. It was a 
living death — they never see or hear of each other more. Tears 
flowed fast, and mine among the rest." Now we ask again, ought 
this buying and selling of human beings to continue another day ? 
You must agree with me in saying, no. But you will ask, what 
can we do? We cannot immediately stop it; and why therefore 
talk about immediate abolition ? I answer, that we can urge im- 
mediate duty upon these buyers and sellers, until they stop sin- 
ning, and that is the only way to stop them. The question before 
us is. What is duty ? what is right? And if you are a Christian, 
or if you have common humanity, you must admit that it is wick- 
ed to tear asunder families, and to treat human beings like cattle. 
You must admit that all persons who practice such cruelty ought 



16 

immediately to stop. So far, then, you are an immediate aholi- 
tionist. 

Take now another point of our definition. Is it right to deprive 
slaves of the means of moral and intellectual culiiire — to withhold 
from them the Hiule, and tlius to make them heathen ? When I 
think of this feature of slavery, and of the indifference with which 
even good men treat this part of the suhject, I know not what to 
say. I have no words that can express my feelings. Here we 
are, talking about tl)e conversion of the world— the ichole world — 
expressing our sympathy for every form of heathenism — sending 
out our missionaries to explore every kingdom and province of 
the empire of darkness — and at the same time, by the laws which 
we enact, and by the public sentiment which we cherish, we are 
making our own countrymen heathen. Thus with one hand we 
are destroying heathenism, and witli the other we are creating it. 
We hear that the Flat-head Indians beyond the Ror ky IMountains 
want missionaries, and immediately the whole church is awake, 
and cries. Send then the men. We hear of a tribe of savages in 
Eastern Africa, called Zoulahs, by whom it is thought missiona- 
ries will be received, and at once five me'n are appointed to that 
station. But we hear of tzvo millions in our own country, the 
most of whom are viriually heathen, and the church says. Be si- 
lent ' he profoundhj silent ! But, sny our opposers, the slaves are 
permitted to receive oral instruction, and the nation is now wak- 
ing up to the importance of giving them oral instruction.* This 
is the very cliniax of inconsistency. Go read the ]\lissionary Her- 
ald. Hear what niissionaries in heathen lands say about the ne- 
cessity of establishing schools and educating the cliildren, because 
the adults are so confiinied in vice and degradation, mental and 
moral, that they are almost beyond hope. See how much time 
they spend in translating the Bible and writing tracts. See them 
making preparatioi.s to convert the whole empire of China, chiefly 
by means of the Bible and other religious books ! Why all this? 
Because a knowledge of letters must accompany, and in some ca- 
ses go before oral ins! ruction, in order to raise up the mind from 
heathenism. Oral insiiiiction is good, peculiarly good, in its 
place; but it will be comparatively powerless alone. And yet 
there are Christians, who make great speeches about the import- 



* It ie stated by those wlio believe tlint ornl iiistnirtion is all that the 
elaves in p^e^ent circiim.^taiices ouirlil to receive, iliat in some Sahbalii 
schools lor slaves, the elnldren jirqiiire as much kiiowlediro o! llie iJible as 
while children who can read. Tliis only proves that we, are under pecul- 
iar ohniratioiis to ciillivate in every possilrle way minds ihal are so easily 
instructed. There musl he now and 'hen a Toiissaiiii LmivoiUire amoniir 
such children. Great must be the sin of ktepiii;^ back the kiiowleiige of 
letters from such minds. 



17 

"atice of Bible societies, and Sunday schools, and Tract societies, 
and Education societies, who think that oral instruction for slaves 
will on the whole do very well, and that it would be wrong to dis- 
turb the prejudices of slave-holders, by insisting upon any thing 
more at present. What a world of inconsistency, and error, and 
prejudice, there is in the minds of many good men on this sub- 
ject ! We boast that we are the most enlightened and religious 
nation on the globe — we talk largely about our common schools, 
and the intelligence of the lower classes — we preclaim to the 
world that we have given every family in the nation a Bible, and 
that we are establishing Sabbath schools in every spot in our 
country where there are enough human beings to form a school, — 
we boast of all these things, while at the same time we strangely 
pretend that the slaves, whose intellects are the most obtuse, and 
therefore need the greatest amount of instruction, can get along 
very well with oral instruction alone ! If this is not making void 
the law of God, I know not what is. 

My heart bleeds when I hear Christians talking thus about oral 
instruction ; and I tremble for my country, when I see her going 
systematically to work, as she has done, to keep a whole race of 
men in the lowest degradation — when I see her making laws that 
shut out men from heaven — when I see her shutting up the soul 
of man, and trampling upon the image of God there. " Wo for 
those that trample on a mind ! a deathless thing ! They know 
not what they do. Man, perchance, may light anew the torch he 
quenches ; but for the soul ! O tremble, and beware not to lay rude 
hands upon God's image there." I tremble for my country, when 
1 think of that vitiated public sentiment pervading the South and 
the North, which can tolerate such high-handed wickedness, and 
can even denounce the men who amid obloquy and persecution 
are doing what they can to show the people their sins. Shall I 
not visit for these thinned saith the Lord. Shall not my soul be 
avenged on such a nation as this ? A wonderful and horrible 
thing is committed in the land : the 2^fophets 2J'>'ophesy falsely, 
and my people love to have it so. 

My friends, I wish you to make up your minds in regard to 
this point. Is it right to shut out the slave from the Bible ? 
Ought not this part of the slave system to cease at once ? Ought 
not every slave holder to begin to-day to teach his servants to read 
the Scriptures ? Do you say that the laws forbid it ? What of 
that? Suppose the laws should forbid you to teach your own 
children to read the Bible. Suppose they should forbid you to 
pray, as Nebuchadnezzar did in the case of Daniel — or to take a 
case exactly in point, suppose the laws should forbid you to pro- 
pagate the Christian religion, as the rulers of the Jews did in llie 
3 



18 

• 
case of Peter and John. Would you obey such laws ? What 
did the apostles do ? Did not we straiily command you, (said the 
rulers) thot ye should not tench in this name 9 and behold ye 
have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to brino- this 
man's blood upon us. This language is just that of our country, 
which says to the abolitionist w^ho comes with the Bible in his 
hand, you will produce insurrection, and bring blood upon us. 
But hear the answer of the apostles : Then Peter and the other 
apostles answered and s<iid, we ou^'ht to obey God rather than 
men. So say we. We are not bound to obey laws which are 
contrary to the laws of God. We are bound to teach men to 
search the Scriptures, though all the laws of earth forbid. What 
Christian does not know that he is bound to obey God rather than 
men, and to break any and all human laws rather than violate 
conscience ? And yet i have been gravely told by men whom I 
very much love and respect, by men of high intelligence and pi- 
ety, that this is the very principle of nullification. They have re- 
minded me of that passage of Paul, Let every soid be subject unto 
the hizfher jiowers. True, the powers that be, are of God ; and 
equally true is it, the powers that be not, are not of God. God 
never authorizes man to legislate in opposition to his legislation. 
But it is asked, are we never bound to submit to unjust laws ^ 
Yes, when we can submit and not break any law of God. But 
when the laws require us to commit any sin, or to neglect any 
duty, then we arc bound to break such laws. This is the doctrine 
of the Bible, and has been the practice of God's people in all 
ages. We can refer to instances without number. There is the 
case of Daniel, already referred to — the case of Hananiah, other- 
wise called Shadrach, and his two companions — the case of the 
apostles, in several instances — and the case of the primitive Chris- 
tians, who refused to bear arms, and who in thousands of instances 
died martyrs, because they refused to say one word that should 
be disrespectful to their Divine Master. There is the case also 
of the Waldenscs and Albigenses, who were inhumanly massacred 
because they would not comply with the unchristian demands of 
the church of Rome, one of the most obnoxious of which de- 
mands was, as in the very case under consideration, that the 
Scri/iturcs be kept from the hands of the common people. I might 
sjieak likewise of the Huguenots of Prance, the Puritans of Png- 
land, the Covenanters ot Scotland, who were persecuted and kill- 
ed because they obeyed God rather than man. 1 will allude to 
one more instance only. A short time since the Secretaries of the 
American Board, in dcjlivering their instructions to Mr. I^arker, 
who was about to sail lor China as a missionary, gave him among 
other directions llie following : " If he [the missionary] finds a 
people willing to receive him, he is to persevere m publishing to 



19 

them the message of salvation, though laws and magistrates forbid 
and even at the expense of liberty and life. He is not indeed to 
court persecution ; but a people willing to receive the gospel are 
not to be abandoned, though all the enactments and power of their 
rulers are arrayed against their instruction." It is humiliating to 
be obliged to argue this point — to be obliged to prove, in the year 
1834, that we are bound to obey God rather than man — a doc- 
trine well understood and acted upon as far back at least as the 
days of Moses, who owed his life to the fact that his parents un- 
derstood this doctrine and carried it out in practice. 1 do think 
that abolitionists have a right to complain, when they are bitterly 
reproached, as they have been throughout the land, for teaching 
this plain doctrine of the Bible, that we are not bound to obey 
laws that are contrary to the laws of God. 

We come back now to the question, Is it right to withhold in- 
struction from the slave, another day ? Ought not the slave-hold- 
er to commence at once the instruction of his servants, or at least 
to permit others to do it ? Is it right to keep them in heathenism 
any longer ? Is it right to persist another moment in the awful 
crime of trampling upon the soul — of putting out the candle of the 
Lord in the immortal mind ? I believe you will all agree with me 
on this point. You will admit that the slaves ought to- receive 
something besides oral instruction, and that all the laws which for- 
bid it are wicked and ought to be repealed. On this jwint also, 
then, you are an immediate abolitionist. 

Call me not severe, when I say that such laws are wicked, and 
that the making and executing of such laws is a horrid crime. 
Language does not furnish words sufficiently strong to indicate 
the dreadfulness of this crime. Murder is considered the worst 
of crimes ; but that is a crime against the body — this is perpetra- 
ted against the soul. It is the murder of the immortal spirit. It 
is making men beasts, in order that they may be more safely and 
profitably worked. It is shutting them out from instruction, for 
fear that they will learn they are men, and refuse to be treated as 
cattle. It is endeavoring to put out from the body that soul 
which God has put into it, because it is dangerous to abuse tlw 
body so long as it is inhabited by a soul that is conscious of its 
high origin and its eternal destiny. And when we see all this 
done by high-minded, intelligent. Christian men — when we see it 
done systematically, by law — when we see it done with cool, cal- 
culating tenacity of purpose, year after year, and generation after 
generation — when we see it done in the blazing light of such an 
age as this, at a time when all the world is crying out against such 
things, — where shall we find language to describe this crime ? 
To call it theft, or robbery, is tame. If a man steals my cloak, I 
call him a thief; but what shall I call the man who steals my 



20 

.body, and then puts out my soul, in order that he may retain the 
stolen property unmolested ? I have dwelt particularly on this 
point, because it is a shocking feature in our slave system. We 
hear it said every day that the slaves are well treated ; and what 
do men mean by this? Why, that their bodies are well treated. 
And so we treat our horses and oxen well. Indeed, horses and 
oxen are treated belter than the slaves generally are. Let a man 
be seen flogging his horse as cruelly as the slaves are flogged on 
some of the plantations, and he would cease to be respectable. 
But suppose the facts were otherwise. Suppose the slaves were 
all treated as kindly as horses usually are. Suppose them as con- 
tented and happy as they are said to be. Admit that they can 
laugh and sing amid their chains, and ridicule the idea of free- 
dom. W'hat does this prove ? Do you not see that it furnishes 
us widi the most powerful of all arguments against the whole sys- 
tem ? Do you not see that when you have shown that the slave 
can dance and make merry in his degradation, that you iiave 
proved him to be little else than a brute ? Slavery has quenched 
the light of the soul — it has well nigh expelled the glorious spirit 
from the body — it has transformed the human being into an up- 
right beast, — and this you call kind treatment. Because the 
heaven-born soul is brought 50 low, that it is contented with the 
very dust, and degradation, and pollution in which it grovels, you 
conclude that the slave is happy and well treated. Strange, that 
good men, intelligent men, should talk about the Icind treatment 
of slaves, when the very facts which they adduce in proof are the 
strongest proof of their inhuman treatment. Suppose your own 
children and your brothers and sisters were shut out from all 
knowledge, and reduced almost to the condition of cattle,, so that 
they should be incapable of any enjoyment except animal enjoy- 
ment ; and suppose that they were contented and merry in their 
brutish condition ; suppose farther they had become so debased as 
almost to lose the desire of freedom — would you, because they 
happened to have food enough to keep them from starving, and 
clothing enough to cover their nakedness, call this kind treatment? 
If the persons who had thus treated your children and kindred 
should call themselves humane and kind, what would you say ? 
You would exclaim, out upon such humanity ! it is the worst of 
inhumanity. Away with such kindness ! it is of all cruelty the 
most shocking. The nearer you come to proving that the slave 
is contented and happy in his degradation, the nearer you come 
to j)roving by the sume aigument that the slave is a brute in intel- 
lect, and that his oppressor is cruel to the soul, alihough he 
may be kind to the body. I hope tiiat reasonable men will give 
up this arguuu'nt, and cease to make tlie thread-bare and laisc 
assertion that the slaves are well treated ; for, be it known, it is 



21 

not kind treatment first to imbrute a man by extinguishing his 
mind, and then to feed him well as you do a horse. 

Look now to another point of our definition. In the two posi- 
tions already noticed, I believe the audience have agreed with 
me. Let us see if we can still go on together. Is it right to 
break up the marriage institution among slaves, and make them 
beasts in tliis respect, as well as in many others ? Is it right to 
encourage, in the words of !Mr. Breckenridge, " universal prosti- 
tution ? " I will not insult this audience by reasoning one moment 
on this point. There can be but one opinion — you will all say 
that this pan of the system ought immediately to cease. On this 
point, then, you are an immediate abolitionist. 

There is one other point to be considered. Is it right to de- 
prive men "of the entire earnings of their labor, except only so 
much as is necessary to continue labor, thus committing clear rob- 
bery ?" Is it right thus to hold property in man ? Perhaps you 
will say that holding property in man is not necessarily robbery, 
and that it may in some instances be allowable. At least, you 
think it unjust to break up at once this right of property in slaves^ 
because the laws have hitherto recognised this right, and thus en- 
couraged the owners or their ancestors to invest their capital la 
this way ; and now the owners are entitled to protection, on the 
same principle that manufacturers are. Thus you adopt the fun- 
damental principle of slavery, that a man is not a man, but a thing 
or a beast ; and that consequently the sudden repeal of the slave 
laws and the sudden repeal of the tariff would be equally unjust. 
When will men learn the first principles of moral truth ? What 
can be more plain, than that the laws cannot give to one class of 
men the right to own the bodies and minds of another class of 
men ! What proposition is self-evident, if not this one, that every 
man owns himself^ And yet our countrymen, all over the land, 
talk about the injustice of abolition. They call it infringing upon 
the property and rights of the slave-holder. He has inherited, 
they say, this species of property, and he cannot equitably be de- 
prived of it.* I know not how to reason with those who thus 

* Does ininsiipe,by descendinjr from father to sen for two or tliree frenera- 
tions. become justice ? The difference between the present fjeiieration and 
the first jjeiieration of slave-holders is this, the one commenced a system of 
wrong, and the other contimies it. It is very mucli iike the case of Adam 
and his posterity. If we charge the whole fruilt of slavery upon a former 
generation, on the same principle we should make tlie first parests of our 
race accountable for all the sin that has since been committed. Sup|X)se 
that your lather had built his house upon the grounds of another man, and 
tliat at his death he had bequeathed the property thus unjustly seized upn 
to you, and that this is alt you hove — Is that property now yours? No. 
The title is in another man and he can claim the estate If, then, you can- 
not inherit land unjustly seized upon, how can you inherit a whole human 



22 

commit outrage upon first principles. If men will contend that 
the slave-holder has property in his slaves, that the black man 
does not belong to himself, we shall not condescend to reason with 
them. Here is a man standing upon the necks of one hundred of 

being ? What is your title to his hody and mind, received from yonr father, 
worth, compared with the hifrher title to his entire self wliich the nian has 
received liom tlie Father of all ? Suppose lliat an Iri.-h landlord has an 
estate which is lluMiied out to a hundred tenants, from each of whom he ex- 
acts double the rent which they can afford to pay, bo that they are obliged 
to live in abject wretchedness. He dies and leaves the estate to his heir. 
Will that heir be justified in oppressing his tenants on the ground that hia 
lather did so before him? Certainly not. By what principle of right then, 
can the slave-holder withhold from another hundred human beings not on- 
ly all property, but what is ftir dearer, liberty? 

One illustration more. — Suppose that a planter in Virginia dies to-day 
and bequeathes to me one hundred slaves. — This places me in the condition 
of every young slave-holder when he comes of age. What must I do? 
The laws lorbid emancipation. What co« I do ? Shew me some "j9/o7i." 
This is precisely the dilflculty of our Southern brethren who wish to get 
rid of slavery. In such a case I should perhaps consider myself bound to 
be the master of the slaves, in the eye. of the law, until I could get them 
away from the law or the law away from them, but I would dismiss the 
overseer, and say to them ' I will consider you as hired laborers and give 
you wages. I will never sell you. I will give you the Bible and teach 
you to "stYWc/i" it ; and I will use all my influence tn procure a change of 
the laws so that you can be free in form as well as in fact; or if you choose 
to go to the free States, or to Liberia, or to go abroad here as freemen, you 
are at liberty to do as you please.' 

Connected with this argument which attempts to defend slave-holding on 
the ground oi'i-i^ht anti justice, there is another which proceeds ujxjn the 
ground of e^yediency. It is said that the slave would be injured by eman- 
cipation, and that consequently he should be first prepared for freedom. 
To this argument, these remarks may be made in reply. First. — It is not 
right to eitstave men in order to make them happy. One ol the arguments 
used in support of the slave trade was, that it was better for the negroes to 
be removed (roni the cruelties and superstitions of Africa, to a country 
when; they might be christianized. The fallacy of this argument is now 
admitted, so lar as it resj)ects the slave-trade. It is conceded that men are 
not to be taken from Africa and made slaves, even lor tiie good of their 
t?ouls. II, then, we may not commence a system ol wrong, in order to make 
men more hap|)y, neither can we be justified in continuhifr that system af- 
ter it has been commenced. Secondly. — There is no evidence that the 
slave would be injured by freedom, for it woufd he almost impos-sible to 
make his condition worse than it is. As a mercdniwal, his situation might 
be more intolerable — but as a moral and intellectual being, I know not how 
his condition couUl be made woi-se. Thirdly. — The slave cannot be ele- 
vated and prepared for liberty, to any considerable extent, while in bond- 
age. Ilt^ does not feel the power of the motives to improvement which act 
upon the freeman. You cannot elevate him, because, while you raise him 
witli one hand, with the other you hold him down. You mu.<t allow him 
to stand forth with the responsibilities of a man and choi)se for himself, — 
you numt treat him as the Creator treats all his children, to wit, as a moral 
agent, belbrc you can produce in him character and principle. " Many 
poUticianBof our time," eaya Thomas Dabingtou M'Auley in the Edinburgh 



23 

liis fellow beings, and he says I am worth fifty thousand dollars. 
Another man standing by says to the abolitionist, you must not 
push him off by law, or by public sentiment, or even make him 
willing to get off himself, because you will destroy his property — 
property which he has inherited, and make him a poor man. 
Shall we reason with such people ? The men who hold such 
dreadful principles may the next moment, for aught we know, 
plant themselves upon our necks, and proceed to tell how much 
they are worth. They and their shocking principles are to be 
driven by the searching eye of religion, and by the great voice of 
public sentiment, from decent society. If any have adopted, ig- 
norantly, without examination, the principle that man may hold 
property in man, we would deal tenderly with such, provided they 
will at once examine and abandon the principle. But if they will 
still hold on upon it, we can only leave them to the mercy of that 
awful storm of public indignation, now beginning to rise in its 
might, to sweep such principles from the nation and from the 
earth. 

I have now gone through with the exposition of our fundamen- 
^1 principles. They are in few words these : 1. It is sinful to 
withhold the Bible from slaves, and it ought to be given them im- 
mediately. 2. It is sinful to destroy the marriage institution among 
slaves, and the slave-holder ought immediately to cease from all 
acts which have this tendency. 3. It is sinful to engage in or to 
be accessory to the domestic slave-trade, and this trade ought to 
be at once abolished. 4. It is sinful to claim or exercise the 
right of property in man, and this principle, which is the funda- 
mental principle of slavery, ought at once to be given up. 

When men talk of gradual abolition, they forget what slavery 
is. They have before their minds a certain form of civil society, 
which they acknowledge to be very bad, but forget that there are 
certain things in the system which are directly contrary to the law 
of God, and which consequently must not be tolerated for a mo- 
ment. They forget that slavery is a transgression of all the laws 
in the decalogue, and that therefore to urge immediate emancipa- 
tion is simply to urge immediate obedience to the ten command- 
ments. The difference between gradual and immediate aboli- 

Review, " are in the habit of layini^ it down a? a eelf evident proposition, 
that no people ought to be free, till they are fit to use their Ireeilom. The 
maxim is worthy the fool in the old story, who resolved not to go into the 
water till he had learned to swim. If men arc to wait for liberty till they 
become wise and good in slavery, they may indeed wait forever." This 
remark was made in reference to political slavery,— its application is still 
stronger in the case before us. Tt is true of nations, and especially true of 
individuals, that they must learn to govern themselves by experience. The 
first step towards improving and elevating them, is to strike olf their chains. 



24 

tronists is this : The advocates of gradual abolition look at the 
whole system as a subject for jiolitical action only. Immediate 
abolitionists look at it as a inoral question. The former are like 
the politicians who would leave heathenism to be gradually under- 
rained by the indirect and silent influences of Christianity, but 
who have little confidence in the plan now pursued by evangelical 
Christians. The latter are like the missionaries, who attack hea- 
thenism directly — who go to individuals and to communities, and 
say to them, you ought immediately to rei)ent of idohitry. The 
work of convincing men that ihey are in the wrong, and of lead- 
ing them to repentance, is of course in this sinfid world always 
gradual; but then the doctrine, and the only doctrine, by which 
this gradual change can be brought about, is that of immediate re- 
pentance. Preach to the heathen the doctrine of gradual repent- 
ance, and when will they repent .'' Never. Preach to slave- 
holders the doctrine of gradual abolition, and they will not move 
a step. That doctrine has been preached for forty years past in 
our country, most faithfully, and what has been the consecjuence ? 
We have gone on, adding slave State to slave State, and in- 
creasing our half a million of slaves to two millions. The doc- 
trine was preached in England, generation after generation, with 
similar results. Attempts were made to reinilate and ameliorate 
slavery, but to use the language of Fox in relation to the slave- 
trade, it was like " attempting to regulate murder." At length, a 
few years since, the doctrine of immediate emancipation was 
preached. At first it met with great opposition, as it now does in 
this country. But it was still preached — converts multiplied — 
the reformation went on, until a majority of the people were im- 
mediate abolitionists. Then Parliament was obliged to act. 

Thus far 1 have spoken of the doctrines of the Anti- Slavery 
Society. I come now to the exljibiiion of the plans and meas- 
ures. The plan is simply this : to preach and publish the truth 
of God in its application to the subject of slave-holding — to induce 
ministers of the gospel at the South and the North to preach on 
this sin, as they do on all ohter sins, that is, afleclionately, judi- 
ciously, but yet faithfully — to induce editors of jiapcrs and other 
periodicals to publish lacts and discussions — to form anti-slavery 
societies, ibr the purpose of publishing and circulating information 
and supporting agents — to carry the subject before ecclesiastical 
bodies, and obtain from them an expression of opinion, as has been 
done in the cause of missions and in the temperance cause. In 
this way it is pro|)Osed to enlighten and reform and embody pub- 
lic sentiment, it is proposed also to prcacji on this subject to 
Congress, by means of ]u;titions for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia and the Territories. And as the reforma- 
tion beginning at the North shall extend South, abolitionists in the 



25 

slave States — and they are already beginning to appear there- 
will petition their respective lps;islatnres, and State after State will 
throw oft' the system. Only let public sentiment all over the land 
be corrected, and put in motion, and slavery falls ; for iti: public 
sentiment, and notliing else, which sustains it. The plan, then, is 
to propagate the doctrines of the gospel in relation to slave-hold- 
ing. But it is asked, what plan have we to propose to slave- 
holders and to the nation, to enable them to get rid of die evil? 
We have no plan, except to expose sin and urge duty. When 
we preach to distillers and rum-sellers, we do not give them any 
plan by which to extricate themselves from the business. We 
simply show them that they are doing wrong, and that they ought 
immediately to stop and do right. We preach in the same way 
on this subject. We point out the sin of holding slaves, and per- 
suade to immediate repentance. But suppose the slave-holder 
says he cannot repent immediately. We reply, that perhaps he 
forgets what slave-holding is. Can he not immediately commence 
teaching the slave to read the Bible ? Yes. Can he not respect 
the marriage institution among blacks, as much as among whites, 
and at once and forever abstain from acts that infringe upon it? 
Yes. Can he not cease from buying and selling human beings, 
and thus, so far as he is concerned, give up at once the domestic 
slave-trade ? Yes. Can he not immediately relinquish his claim 
of property in his slaves, and henceforth regard them and treat 
thera as men, that is, as moral agents, and not as things ? Yes. 
Can he not begin at once to exert all his influence to procure a 
repeal of the slave laws ? Yes. This, then, is immediate eman- 
cipation. The man who does this, does his duty. We ask no- 
thing more than that men renounce all that is wrong, and begin at 
once to keep the ten commandments. We are not politicians, 
nor devisers of schemes. We only wish to see the mind and 
heart of the nation changed on this subject. When that is done, 
there will be plans enough for abolishing slavery. As soon as the 
majority sav it must be done in some way, it will be done in some 
way. And although there will doubtless be a preference as to 
ways, still if the object is only accomplished by voluntary, peace- 
able means, abolitionists will not complain. 

But some perhaps will say, that these are not the principles of 
thoroiigh-g-oing abolitionists. You will find that they are, if you 
will take the trouble to examine. You may sometimes, in one of 
the abolition papers, fiml these j)rinciples clothed in harsh and im- 
proper language ; nevertheless these arc tlieir princifiles. Some 
have asked, why then use the word immediate, when it misleads 
the public in regard to our real principles? We reply, the word 
immediate expresses our views better than any other, and therr- 
4 



26 

fore we use it. Show us a better word, and we will use that. 
The public misunderstand us, because we have heen misrepresent- 
ed Wc use the best words we can find, and explain what we 
mean by them ; and if any will misunderstand us, and refuse to 
read our explanations, what can we do but to retaui our phrase- 
ology, and go on explaining our meanmg as fast as we can get 

men to listen ? i , rru u i^ 

Our principles, then, and our plans, are these : 1. Ihe hold- 
ing of slaves is not merely an evil, like the plague or the cholera ; 
it is asm. 2. Immediate repentance is a duty. 3. 1 his doc- 
trine must be preached through the land. I now desire your at- 
tention, while I notice several objections. , , . - 
First. It is objected that abolitionists use harsh language, and 
manifest a bad spirit. That they have sometimes used language 
unnJcessarilv h^rsh, and sometimes exhibited unkind feelings, 1 
am free to cunfeis, and I sincerely lament it. But I trust vve 
have repented, and that we shall hereafter manifest more of the 
spirit of Christ— of his meekness, as well as of bis boldness. 
It should be remembered, however, that abolitionists have been 
goaded on every side with misrepresentation, with slanderous re- 
ports, with ridicule and contempt, with mobs, with abuse and 
opposition of every kind ; and when it is considered what poor 
human nature is, it is not strange that we have sometimes used 
lan-ua-e that ought not to be used, and have sometimes suffer- 
ed our° feelings to pass beyond virtuous indignation against sm, 
into unkind feelings towards sinners. But who is perlect m 
this respect? Luther, and Calvin, and Knox, and many other 
reformers, exhibited more of unchristian feeling than abolition- 
ists have ever done ; and yet their faults are passed over igluly. 
Some of the early writers and speakers on the subject ol lem- 
perance said many things that were considered at the time un- 
kind. 1 once heard an address by a distinguished man on tem- 
perance, which was the most severe tirade I ever heard on any 
sul.-iect from the mouth of man. It made some angry ; but it was 
set down to the account of excessive zeal, and easily pardoned. 
If our principles are correct, (and I ask for no mercy it they are 
not) why may not we come in for a share ol this lorg.vcncss of 
lighter faults ? Besides, ought we to be censured in \he style in 
u^iich we are, by our opposers ? At a highly respectable meet- 
ing in the city of New York, of which the mayor was chair- 
m-m, while the speakers were some of the best men in the 
countrv, such cpilhels as these were applied to abolilionists- 
« reck'uLs incendiaries," -wild fanatics," ''fire-brands, "blood- 
thirsty, rabid agitators." I have selected these terms from the 
spe.^ches of three gentlemen of whom you have often heard. I 
will oot mention thoir names, because I wi^ not to injure the re- 



27 

putation of men whom I have long respected and loved. In many 
respectable papers, we have been accused of aiming al an infrac- 
tion of the constitution, at insurrection, and every thing bad. I* 
five of the cities of New England and New York mobs have come 
out against us,* and in one instance the mob was harangued by 
one of the most respectable men in New England. And all this 
bitter opposition has risen against us, because we have declared to 
the world our honest opinions. I speak of the treatment of our 
opposers, merely to show that we ought not to be denied all sym- 
pathy because we have been guilty of faults which the rest of the 
world in similar circumstances have always fallen into, to an equal 
and often to a greater extent. Furthermore, let me here correct 
a mistake in relation to this question touching wrong feeling. Some 
persons suppose that all strong- feeling on the pait of abolitionists 
is wrong feeling ; but they forget that we have been searching into 
the cruelties of slavery — that we have been listening to the bitter 
lamentations of the oppressed. They forget that we have heard 
from the best authority such facts as these : " A gentleman of his 
acquaintance." said Mr. Ladd, " was offended with a female slave. 
He seized her by the arm, and thrust her hand into the 6re, and 
there he held it, until it was burnt off. I saw," said Mr. Ladd, 
" the withered stump."f Is it wrong to feel, when we hear of 
such things ? Mr. Sutcliff, an English Quaker, who travelled in 
this country, relates this case : " A slave owner lost a piece of lea- 
ther. He charged a little slave boy with stealing it. The boy 

* This was before the late anti-abolition riots in New- York, Philadelphia 
and other places. 

fit is said that these are instances ofcrnelty which rarely occur,nnd that 
if we reler to them at all as specimens of what slavery i^^, we outrht also to 
place beside them the instances of humanity which are much more common. 
This reasoning is much like that of a man avraiirned for muj-der, who should 
attempt to justify himself on the ground that a single action is not a fair 
specimen of his character, and that he outrht not to be condemned lor it. 
No one pretends that a// masters are cruel. But we say that tlie sT/ston 
which occasionally leads to such outrage, and which allbnis the slave no 
protection against it, is most cruel. Many masters, no douhf, treat their 
slaves as well as they can under the system— i. e. thi'i/ rob their fell o\c-w en 
of their dearest rights in as kind a way as possible. lam sorry to be 
obli'^ed to say things on this subject that are severe: but it is the tridh that 
is severe, and that must not be suppressed. I tiiink I am not wanting in 
love to our brethren of the South. I love their generosity and nobleness of 
character— but I cannot love their oppression. And when I see them sium- 
berin'T over this subject and refusing to act efficiently, trampling the. slave 
in the'dnst and not appearincr to know that it is crininal,! consider that our 
dutv to them, as well as to the oppressed, requires us to speak plainly oat> 
and' assure them that they are doing wrong. So long as they do not turn 
their efforts in earnest to the work of breaking up this system of iniquily, 
we must " cry aloud, spare not, and show the people their transgression. 



28 

denied. The master tied the boy's feet, and suspended him from 
'> the limb of a tree, attaching a heavy weight to his ankles, as is 
usual in such cases, to prevent such kicking and writhing as would 
break the blows. He then whipped. The boy confessed ; and 
then he commenced whipping anew for the offence itself. At 
lengdithe boy died under the lash. Then the slave-holder's own 
son, smitten with remorse, acknowledged that he took the leather." 
Is it wrong to speak of these facts with emotion ? And when we 
recount these facts to our anquaintances, and they reply that there 
are many kind masters, and they do not wish to hear such stories, 
is it wrong to have feeling then'? Is it a sin to sympathize with 
the slave ! When we behold a proud and cruel nation stretching 
forth its hand of oppression to crush the faculties, and sending out 
its breath of prejudice to wither the hopes of an unoffending, help- 
less race, is it a sin to step forth and speak in their behalf, with all 
the feeling we have ? Oh, my country ! am I doing wrong be- 
cause I plead before you the cause ol your down-trodden, speech- 
less children, who cannot and who dare not plead for themselves? 
Will you tell me that 1 am a man of bad spirit, because I am not 
cold-hearted on such a subject as this? " You can easily possess 
yourself of facts," says Samuel J. Blills, " the bare recital of which 
will make the heart bleed. These facts must be proclaimed in 
the ears of the people, that they may be induced to send the hope 
of the gospel to the expiring and despairing slave." Shall we be 
called mad men, because we aie deeply in earnest in this cause? 
because we lU'ge our friends to listen to our facts, and read our 
publications ? because we cannot speak of the miseries and wrongs 
of the negro in a cool, calculating, heartless way ? because we 
consider the subject sufficiently important to be carried into our 
closets, and into our prayer-meetings? I believe that any one 
who will put himself in our place, and look steadily a little while 
at the condition of the slave, will not blame us for having very 
strong feeling, 

2. It is ohjccted thai Air. Garrison is a hading man in the so- 
ciety, and that his paper tends to produce insurrection. The 
cause of abolition docs not depend upon Mv. Garrison, and it 
would be unjust to charge his faults on the society. His paper is 
not the organ of the society — he alone is responsible for it. He 
has injiiicd himself and the cause of abolition by his harsh and 
undignified, and sometimes unchristian language. 1 dislike his 
manner ol treating this subject. Nevcrtheh^ss, we should not 
condemn any man outright because he is not perfect, for ac- 
cording to that principle we should all be condcnmed. His char- 
acter and principles are not understood. As it respects the*ten- 
dency of his paper to produce insurrection, there is mistake on that 



29 

point. He inculcates the duty of submission and non-resistance* 
In one of his anti-slavery hymns, he uses the following language : 

And ye wlio are like cattle sold, 
Bear meekly still your cruel woes. 

Not by the sword your liberty 

Shall be obtained in human blood — 

Not by revolt or treachery — 

Revenge did never bring forth good. 

God's tin7e is best— 'twill not delay- 
E'en now your cause is blossoming. 

This is not the language of an incendiary. It is a happy thing 
that abolitionists generally adopt the thorough-going Quaker prin- 
ciple in regard to the sword and self-defence. Possessing as they 
do great influence over the blacks, they will be able to do more 
toward preventing insurrections than all the mihtary power of the 
nation. So long as abolitionists are permitted to proceed with 
their plans, and thus to hold out to the oppressed the hope of de- 
liverance, there will be little danger of insurrection. But put down 
the abolitionists, and thus destroy all hope, and you vvill see soon- 
er or later such convulsions as will make the nation tremble. 
Before leaving Mr. Garrison it should be remarked, that severe 
language in reference to slavery is not to be censured. It would 
be treacherous to the interests of the victim, to speak of slavery in 
such language as to keep out of view its odiousness. Unnecessa- 
ry severity, and especially all angry feeling, is of course wrong. 
But many persons seem to forget that there is another extreme 
into which they may run, and that it is just as wrong to use lan- 
guage that is too soft and mild, as it is to use language which is 
too severe. They forget too, that when any sin has become re- 
spectable, in consequence of the number and high standing of 
those who practice it, that we are in far greater danger of speak- 
ing too smoothly of it, than of speaking too harshly. When we 
read the life of the late King of England, and find him spoken of 
as Qgood man, and all his vices palliated by calling them "youth- 
ful foibles," do we not say that the man who writes such a book 
encourages vice, and that his fault is more unpardonable than that 
of the man who exposes the vices of kings in language too severe ? 
So in this case, while some abolitionists have been too severe, 
have not the great body of the nation been quite as much in the 
wrong in covering up this sin with soft language, and with excuses 
for the slave-holder ? Let it be observed, that in this sinful world, 
all moral truth which is not abstract and over our heads— all truth 
which relates to the heart and conduct of man— is and must be 
severe. The man who does not know this, has never yet learned 
to preach the gospel on any subject. 



30 

3. It is objected that this is a political question. I once feared 
that it vvonld be so, and I hesitated long on this account, watching 
closely the movements of abolitionists, determining not to move in 
this business till 1 should be satisfied on this point. I am now 
thoroughly convinced that this reformation is to be a religious and 
moral, not a political reformation. It has commenced where it 
ought, at the house of God, aniong Chiistians, Political partizans, 
and particularly the mob of tlie country, are, and for some time to 
come will continue to be, opposed to it. Political men will at 
last take it up and carry it through Congress and through the State 
.Legislatures — but that will not be done, until it shall have become 
a relijLfious feeling'- throughout a majority of the nation that slavery 
must be abolislied. The progress of this reformation in this coun- 
try will doubtless be similar to what it was in England, where for 
several years it was a moral question, and then for one year it was 
both a political and moral question. No evils arose in that coun- 
try, from the bearings which this subject has upon politics — none 
need be apprehended in this country. 

4. It is objected that this Society encourarres amalgamation. 
This is altogether (alse — a slander upon the Society, and it is the 
duty of christians not only not to countenance this report, but to 
do what they can to counteract it. With the subject of intermar- 
riages we have nothing to do. We do not desire to see such things 
take place, nor on the other hand do we think it wise or proper to 
make laius against them. If, in here and there an instance, the 
two races shall intermarry, we shall consider them as persons of 
had taste, and there we shall leave the matter. Those who dread 
amalgamation, do not consider that the very thing which they fear 
is now taking place in all the slave States at a tremendous rate, 
and that emancipation will immediately check and at length nearly 
put an end to this sin. Abolitionists firmly believe that their plans 
are better fitted than any others to discourage amalgamation. 

6. It is objected that it ivould be dangerous and excccdinsrly 
unwise to turn loose two millions of iiznorant, vicious persons. So 
say we. Wc have never advocated the turning loose of slaves. 
On the contrary, we say it would be wrong for the slave-holder to 
set them afloat on society, as vagabonds. He is bound to give 
them employment and to see that they are instructed, and legisla- 
tive bodies are bound to pass laws adapted to their condition. — 
The emancipation of slaves from the arbitrary control of an ir- 
responsible oppressor, and placing them under the protection of 
law, is one thing, and turning them loose is another. The latter 
would no doubt be attended with serious evils — the former is safe. 
It is strange that some persons sec such horrors in emancipation, 
when all theory and all experience tell us it is safe. We appeal 
to South Africa for proof of the safety of emancipation. We ap- 



31 

peal to Mexico. Above all we refer you to St. Domingo. If those 
who talk of St. Domingo and its horrors will study the history of that 
Island as presented by Clarkson, one of the most honest and can- 
did men living, they will find that those dreadful massacres took 
place either before the emancipation of the negroes, or at the 
time when the attempt was made to reduce them back to slavery; 
and that during the intermediate period of several years, every 
thing was quiet, the negroes continuing to work on the plantations 
as hired laborers. At this period, " the colony," says the French 
general, " marched as by enchantment towards its ancient splen- 
dour." Emancipation has taken place all over the Christian 
world, except in Brazil, a few of the West India Islands and this 
country, and without any bad results. But it will be said that the 
emancipation has not been immediate. I reply that it has been m 
most cases either in the strict sense immediate, or an immediate 
change from slavery to apprenticeship for a few years — and give 
us apprenticeship such as they have in the British colonies and 
we shall rejoice, though we do not think that full justice has been 
done to their slaves. If difficulties and insurrections should arise 
in carrying the plan of apprenticeship into effect, it will be, not be- 
cause Parliament went too far, but because they did not go far 
enough. Some will say that emancipation in the West Indies does 
not amount to much, — that it is only taking the slave out of the 
hands of one master and placing him in the hands of another. 
This is a mistake. The difference between slavery as it now ex- 
ists in this country and every kind of apprenticeship is immense. 
Look at apprenticeship in the British Colonies, and apply to it the 
four points of the definition we have given and see how different 
is the condition of the blacks from what it was. First, — The right 
of property in man is forever abolished, and the negro is now re- 
sponsible not to a master but to the law, and this change breathes 
into his soul the energies and the hopes of a man. Second, — ^The 
institution of marriage is protected. Third, — The Bible and all 
kinds and degrees of instruction, are opened to the soul, and it is 
now as much the interest of the community and of the government 
to give instruction, as it before was to withhold it. Fourth, — ^The 
internal slave trade, the buying and selling of men as beasts, and 
all the abominations that result from this sin, are entirely at an end. 
Well may the Englishman now lift up his head among men and 
say, there is not a slave in all our dominions. Give us such an 
emancipation bill as this, and though we will not say it is the best 
possible, yet we will gladly receive it. 

6. It is said that the slove-holder wishes to get rid of slavery ^ 
but cannot. We reply that he wishes for emancipation viery much 
as the irreligious man wishes for religion. The sinner desires the 
rewards of religion, but does not like to pass through the bui^ili*- 



32 

•Ting and troublesome process of conversion. So the slave-hold- 
er desires the blessings and safety of a different mie of society, 
but he loves his own interest so well, that he will never do any 
thing to the purpose if left to himself. The only way to make him 
act is to press truth upon his conscience. 

7. It is objected, that this Society sests itself up as something 
new and peculiar, and arrogates to itself some great discoveries 
on the subject of slavery : — all Christians, it is said are opposed 
to slavery, and what is the use then of making this noise. \Vc re- 
ply that all Christians are opposed to slavery in the same sense in 
which the whole church was opposed to war, and to heathenism 
and to ignorance of the Bible, and to intemperance, before the es- 
tablishment of Peace societies, and Missionary societies, and Bible 
societies, and Sabbath Schools, and Temperance societies : — i. e. 
they are just enough opposed to it to keep still and do nothing. 
Their abolition faith is all dead faith. Their principles Ijave been 
so long unused and laid by, that they are like the speculative belief 
which some men have in Christianity, wliich does tiiem no good, 
but on the contrary aggravates their condemnation. "Trutlis of 
all others the most awful and interesting," says Coleridge, " are 
too often considered as so true, that they lose all the power of truth, 
and lie bed-ridden in the dormitory of the soul, side by side with 
the most despised and exploded errors." 

8. It is objected that the society is doins!' nothinn- — that it has 
not emancipated any slaves. With equal propriety it might have 
been said that the abolitionists of England, the day before the 
passing of the emancipation bill, had done nothing, and emancipa- 
ted no slaves. The cause of abolition in this country has made 
surprising progress in the last year. Tiie whole country is now 
thinking of this subject. The General Association of this State 
has recently passed a resolution, declaring " that to buy and sell 
human beings, and treat them as merchandise, is an immcn-ality 
inconsistent with the Christian religion." The ecclesiastical bodies 
of two other New England States have passed siniihir resolutions. 
Very soon the subject will come up in the l^resbytcriau church, 
and measures will be taken to induce ministers and members of 
that church in slave-holding States to do their duty. Other 
churches will do the same ; and thus the reformation will go on, 
till public opinion shall be purified — and who knows not that /lub- 
lic opinion can do every thing ? It puts down old governments, 
and puts up new ones ; it can prostrate one system, and erect 
another on its ruins ; it can drive vice like a swee[)ing tornado 
from the world, and it can gather virtue in its arms like a guardian 
angel. Public sentiment, tliou art every thing ! Let thy voice, 
then, go forth, and utter its denunciations in the halls of slavery, 
and thoj will fall. Let the light of thy searching eye penetrate the 



33 

recesses of selfishness, and sophistry, and sensuality, and all our 
darkness on this suhject will be as noon-day. Let the protection 
of thy powerful liar.d be extended to the black man, ;tiid he will 
be raised from the (ie|.iths of his degradation, and the putting forth 
of the finger at him will cease. 

9. It is said that it is not time yet to commence the aghation of 
this suhject. When, then, will it be time ? We are preparing to 
convert the world ; and can we go and preach righteousness to 
others, while we are cherishing in our ow'n bosom one of the worst 
vices of heathenism ? Had we not better pull the beam out of 
our own eye, and then go and pull the mote out of our brother's 
eye ? We think we are living on the borders of the millennium j 
and shall this sin be permitted to extend out into the millennium — 
a dark promontory of guilt into an ocean of light and purity ? This 
sin lies across the path of all our benevolent efforts. In sending 
our Bibles and our tracts to other countries, we walk directly over 
the bodies and minds of our own countrymen. VVe even enrich 
ourselves, and acquire the means of Christianizing the Hindoo 
and Chinese, by heathenizing the colored American. And with 
this inconsistency, written in letters of blood upon our national 
character — an inconsistency which all the world except ourselves 
can see — shall we say that it is not time rjet to commence the work 
of repentance ? Shall we keep these two millions of the present 
generation in the dust, and gather about their immortal souls still 
darker and heavier clouds of ignorance and pollution, and wait 
till the five millions of the next generation rise up before us, in 
a condition so beset with difficulties that even abolitionists, with 
all their imputed recklessness, will not dare do any thing? Go 
tell the impenitent sinner, along whose pathway the law and the 
gospel utter the curses of God, that he may safely delay repent- 
ance, but tell not this impenitent nation that procrastination is 
safe. 

1 0. It is objected that the measures used by this society will en- 
danger the Union. We reply that the union has long been in 
danger, and that we are seeking to remove as speedily as possible 
the grand cause of jealousy and irritation and danger to the union. 
The nation is diseased, and disease is advancing fast upon the vi- 
tals of the country. This society urges an application of the only 
remedy that can save us. The union of these States must inevi- 
tably be broken up, sooner or later, if slavery continues. The 
sooner, therefore, emancipation begins, the better. But emanci- 
pation never will begin, unless it is first thoroughly discussed. 
Light and facts must be let in upon the whole nation. The law 
of God in relation to this subject must be faithfully preached and 
published throughout the land. Do you say that this is a delicate 

5 



34 

* 
subject, and that thn agitation of it in any way will destroy the 
constitution. This is a libel on the constitution. Our constitution 
would not be worthy of respect, if there were any moral subject 
on which we could not safely preach the truth faithfully. What ! 
do you tell us that we are living under a constitution which will be 
destroyed if the sins of the nation are exposed — if the truth 
of God is fearlessly preached. How could you more cer- 
tainly bring the constitution into contempt, than by speaking so 
lightly of it? We think differently of the constitution. We re- 
spect and love it, and for the very reason that we believe that we 
may preach the truth on an any subject with safety. I might dwell 
long on this topic, but there is not time. I will only say in dis- 
missing it, that such is the state of things in this country, and such 
the relations which we sustain to the moral interests of the world, 
that if this reformation does not go forward, this nation is ruined, 
and the conversion of the world thrown back none can tell how far. 
11. Ji! is said that the Bible does not condemn slavery, nor re- 
quire immediate emancipation. He who says so, forgets what 
American slavery is. Does the Bible sanction the continuance of 
the domestic slave-trade — the buying and selling of men as we sell 
horses? Does it allow us to separate wives from husbands, and 
parents from children, and thus to break up families and the insti- 
tution of marriage ? Does it countenance the worse than papal 
doctrine of withholding from men not only the Bible, but all other 
books ? Does it teach that an Ethiopian does not belong to him- 
self, but to some other person — that he is to be accounted "goods 
and chattels, to all intents and purposes," — that men may hold 
property in immortal beings, created in the image of God ? The 
whole spirit of the Bible is against such tilings. It is against op- 
pression and injustice in every form, and surely it condenms in- 
justice so flagrant. And whatever it condemns as wrong, it re- 
quires should be immediately repented of. The idea of fj^radual 
repentance is not to be found in the Book. But it is said that 
there are some things in the Scriptures which apjiear to excuse, if 
not to justify slavery. So the Scriptures contain some things which 
appear to justify polygamy. The IMohammedan could make out 
a more plausible argument in favor of this sin, than has ever been 
brought forward in justification of slave-holders. The Bible has 
been quoted also in opposition to the doctrines of the temperance 
reform. It has been urged that the principle of total abstinence 
is not in the Bible ; <ind ills quite as didicult to satisfy an opposer 
of lempcnince on this point, as it is to satisfy tui opposer of aboli- 
tion ill regard lo the sinfulness of pliivc-hohling. Those who goto 
llu" IJiblii for arguments in favor of doing wrong, seldom fail of 
finding somediing to answer their purpose. The time is coming, 
however, when men will be ashamed of their attempts to justify 



So 

slave-holding from the word of God. But it is farther said, there 
is no specific command on this subject. Suppose it were so. 
Neither is there any specific command which foibids forgery. 
There is no mention whatever of forgery in the Bible. Js it 
therefore innocent ? It is not true, however, that there is nothing 
specific in the Scriptures on this subject. In the 58th chapter of 
Isaiah, we find this passage : " Is not this the fast that 1 liave cho- 
sen, to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, 
and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke ? " 
There is also another specific command of the Bible, that forbids 
such slavery as we have been considering. It is the eighth com- 
mand of the decalogue : Thou shcdt not steal. Tliis forbids our 
taking any part of the property of another. But the holder of 
slaves takes the whole — the time, the wages, the body, tlie mind, 
every thing in short that can possibly be grasped. We put the 
question, now, to conscience, are the principles of right and wrong, 
are the requirements of God's law so contradictory, so absurd, 
that they make it a high crime to steal even a dollar from one 
man, while they allow you to steal from another man all that he 
hath — his whole self? * 

Again, it is said that our Saviour and his apostles did not preach 
against slavery. The reason why the Saviour is silent on this 
subject doubtless is, that slavery did not then exist in Judea. The 
apostles afteiwards came in contact with it, but did not attack it 
for two reasons : first, the slavery with which they had to do was 
in one important respect different from that which exists in Our 
country. It did not require tlie shutting out of instruction, and 
the consequent degradation of the soul. Terence, the poet, was 
a slave. Horace was the son of a freedman. The slaves of whom 
Paul speaks in his epistles were not forbidden to read those epis- 
tles. Secondly, the apostles attacked the prominent and worst . 
sins of the age. Paul's preaching to the Athenians was directed 
against idolatry, because, as he passed through their streets, that 
was the worst sin he saw. Were he to visit the plantations of 
America, he would preach against slavery. He would not look 
upon a population denied the Bible and essentially heathen, though 
in the midst of an enlightened and Christian country, and yet keep 
silence. He would not see men treated as property, bought and 
sold as brutes, and then call it a delicate subject, and no concern 
of his. 

12. It is maintained that expediency justifies the continuance of 
slavery, at least for the present. The word expediency is used in 
different senses. It has referenr e to the greatest good. We may 

* He that stealeth a man and solloili him, or if /"• hr C^imrl id hisha7id, 
he shall surely be put to death. — Exod. xxi. 16. 



mean the greatest good of the whole universe, throughout eterni- 
ty, or we may mean the greatest presejit good. Expediency un- 
derstood in the first mentioned sense, as referring to tlie whole 
moral system in the lotig run, as it is called, is doubtless to be re- 
garded. But where expediency has respect to a part only of the 
universe, and to a small segment only of the great circle of eter- 
nity, the case is essentially changed. Expediency of the former 
kind, that is, on the great scale, coincides exactly with right and 
the law of God, and is in fact but another name for right, and du- 
ty, and law — inasmuch as right and law are founded upon regard 
to the greatest good, ov lieneral expediency. But expediency of 
tlie latter kind, i. e. on the small scale, may be the same as self- 
ishness and sin. And it is in this last mentioned sense that the 
word is commonly used. In no sense, consequently, does expe- 
diency justify a departure from the laws of God — for general ex- 
pediency being the same thing in principle as the law, of course 
requires the same thing, namely, obedience ; and jiartkd expedi- 
ency, for the very reason that it is partial, cannot set aside the 
higher and paramount claims of the law. To render the point 
under consideration more clear, let it be illustrated thus : Suppose 
that you owe an intemperate man ten dollars — that he demands 
payment of the debt — that you fear if you pay him he will go to 
the dram-shop, become intoxicated, and then go home and abuse 
liis family. VVhat ought you to do in such a case ? Expediency 
on the small scale says, withhold the money — at the best it can do 
him no good, and there is danger that the consequences may be 
bad. On the other hand, the law of God and general expe- 
diency say, pay the man — you justly owe him, and you must not 
do wrong to prevent another from doing wrong. Do your duty, 
and leave the consequences with God. If you jiay the money, it 
may occasion sin and suffering ; but if you withhold it, you will 
"break through a principle upon which the interests of the universe 
and of eternity depend — you will transgress the everlasting law of 
truth and honesty, and what is worse still, you will set up your 
opinion of what is best above that of the Supreme Ruler ; for he 
has told you that the best way to promote the general good is to 
render unto all their dues, whereas you decide that it is better in 
some cases not to render that which is due. You take it upon 
yourself to set aside the law of God, whenever you think that your 
own plan is better. But this must not be. However honestly 
you may difler from God in your views of what is best, you must 
not disobey. If )ou are the owner of slaves, and honestly think 
that it is for their interest not to have the Bible, nor to receive 
pay lor their !;;l)or, you must not transgress the Divine law. ]'2ven 
if you could jirovc that it would be belter for your bondsmen to 
continue as they are fur the present — a position that has beea 



I 



37 

often taken, but never proved — still you do not know that it will 
be better on the whole, on the broad scale of eternity, to deny 
them the privileges of freemen. So that you cannot prove it to be 
even expedient (understanding the word as it ought to be under- 
stood) to claim the right of property in your Icllow men. 

13. It is said, that conceding all which'has been advanced, still 
the best way to attack slavery is to preach the gospel, and thus 
undermine it by indirect means. We say in reply, by all means 
preach the gospel, but be sure that you preach the whole gospel — 
undermine slavery, but do it in the only way in whichjt can be 
done, by attacking the false principles upon which it is based. 
This indirect way of undermining slavery has been tried for years, 
and the system, instead of being weakened, has waxed stronger 
and stronger. So long as intemperance was attacked only in the 
indirect way, by preaching the gospel, as you call it, that is, by 
preaching against all other sins except the one to be destroyed, 
the sin grew worse and worse ; but when the doctrine of total ab- 
stinence was announced, and urged directly, faithfully, in the face 
of opposiuon, then intemperance was beaten back. So now, let 
the doctrine that it is a sin to hold property in man — a doctrine 
which strikes at the root of the whole slave system — be faithfully 
preached, and the whole system will come to the ground, and no 
other moral means can bring it down. Indirect means, and the 
doctrine of gradual repentance, will have the same effect upon 
slavery that the doctrine of moderate drinking once had upon in- 
temperance — they will perpetuate and increase the evil. 

14. I notice but one more objection. It is said that abolition- 
ists oppose the Colonization Society. It is not true that we wish 
to put down the colony at Liberia. We wish to have it prosper, 
and therefore we wish to prevent crowding its population with 
vicious and improper persons. I quote the following from Mr. 
Garrison's thoughts on colonization : " Let the colony continue to 
receive the aid and elicit the prayers of the good and benevolent. 
Blot it not out of existence. But henceforth let it develope itself 
naturally. Crowd not its population. Let transportation cease. 
Seek no longer to exile millions of our colored countrymen ; for 
assuredly, if the Colonization Society succeed in its efforts to re- 
move thousands of this number annually, it could not indict a 
heavier curse upon Africa, or more speedily assist in the entire 
subversion of the colony." Only let the colony be well managed, 
and we hope that hereafter it will be — let ardent spirits be exclu- 
ded, and the society is doing what it can to bring this about — let 
the colony be made as far as possible a Christian colony for the 
benefit of Africa, and not a place for turning loose thousands of 
ignorant and vicious persons — and we shall make no objection to 
such a colony. On the contrary, we will encourage it. Still_we 



38 

see no connectlon^belween a colony and the abolition of slavery^ 
and but little connection between a colony and the spiritual good 
of Africa. Some of our objections to tlie Colonization Society 
are the following; and in order to show th;it they are well found- 
ed, I will quote the words of tlie friends of the society. JMr, Ger- 
rit Smith, in his speech at the last annual meeting of the society, 
remarked that " the belief is prevailing pretty rapidly at the North, 
that our society obstructs the dearly cherished cause of emanci- 
pation. 1 would that we bad not given too much cause for the 
propagation of this belief. If there are apologies for slavery, it is 
not for our society to hunt them up. 11" there are efibrls made 
for tlie abolition of slavery, it does not belong to our society to op- 
pose them. Our society, by offering such apologies and by op- 
posing such efforts, has already cooled the ardor of many of its 
friends, and greatly multiplied its opponents. The objection to 
our society is well taken, that in some of its publications it assumes 
the position that slavery in this country is to be opposed by indi- 
rect means only, and that in the society, in itself alone, are these 
means to be found." JMr. Smith proceeds: " There is another 
objection to this society, which to my mind is still more weighty : it 
is, that it has been greatly, lamentably, wickedly deficient in pity 
for the free people of color. 1 will not deny to tlie colored man 
a perfect right to a home on this soil. 1 regret that any member 
of this society should ever have denied this right. It is no won- 
der to me that they have had feelings of jealousy toward us, 
and a want of confidence in the sincerity of our professions of 
kindness. We ourselves have given too much occasion for this, 
in our speeches and [)ublications. We have looked too little to 
their benefit, and too much to the political and social advantages 
which we supposed would arise to ourselves from the separation. 
And our project, which should have been held up as one of the 
purest and highest benevolence, has been degraded to a mere 
drain for the escape of this nuisance." " Let us correct this, 
and place our society on its true ground ; let us make Africa a 
desirable home for men of color, and they will find their own way 
to its shores." Mr. IJreckenridge, at the same meeting, said, 
" There is an immense aggregate of blame somewhere, and I 
want to find out where it belongs, and put it there. Two years 
ago I warned the managers against this \'irginia business. And 
yet they sent out two ship loads of vagabonds, not fit to go to such 
a |)lacc, and that were coerced away as truly as if it had been 
done with a cart whip." ^h. Hacon, at the same meeting, re- 
marked, that " not only the state of the society, but the condition 
of the colony, was such as must horrify every friend of the cause. 
He believed it would reciuire an expenditure of fifty thousand 
dollars during the present year, to put the colony on a fooling of 



39 

prosperity." To such colonizationists we do not object ; and so 
soon as the society generally shall come into these views, and 
shall cease to stand in the way of efforts for the improvement and 
emancipation of the colored race, then the two societies can 
be like brothers in the same holy cause. Till then, however, 
we consider it our duty to the slaves, to our country, and to the 
Colonization Society, to state our objections honestly, fearlessly, 
yet kindly. That spirit of unkindness which has been so common 
on both sides, it is hoped will cease. 

And now, my friends, I have placed before you the principles 
and designs of the Anti-Slavery Society. I leave it for you to de- 
cide what your duty is to the slave, or whether you have any duty 
to discharge to him. For myself, I feel impelled, by all there is 
of humanity and religion within me, to engage in this cause. I 
know that 1 do it with the disapprobation of friends whom I love 
and respect ; but my conscience will not let me do otherwise. I 
must go with the abolitionists. I must go and take my stand with 
them, between the oppressor and the oppressed, and with one 
hand stretched out to the oppressor, we will say, repent ; and 
with the other stretched out to the oppressed, we will say, avenge 
not yourselves. This is our ground, and no power on earth will 
€ver be able to drive us from it ; for we stand upon the great prin- 
ciples of Christianity. We have on either side the pillars of truth 
and justice. We have with us our Bible and our God. And 
think you we can ever abandon such ground as this ? We have 
beheld the tears of the op])ressed, tvho have no comforter. We 
have undertaken to plead their cause, and we mean to plead it, so 
long as we have a voice to lift up in their behalf. At the North 
and at the South, we mean to plead their cause. Wherever the 
spirit of slave-holding exists, we shall preach repentance. Say- 
not that we are wanting in courage, because we do not go to the 
South. We are there already, and we shall soon be there in 
greater numbers. We shall go there, and say unto slaves. Obey 
your masters, and unto masters. Give unto your slaves that which 
is just and equal. We wish not insurrection. We are men of 
peace. We have thrown away entirely and forever the sword of 
man, and have taken in its place the sword of the Spirit, which is 
the word of God. If the enemies of truth shall sometimes be 
stirred up to anger, we shall not be in fault. They will soon learn 
that we tell them the truth, not because we arc their enemies, but 
because we are their friends — not because we are wild fanatics, 
but because we are honest Christians — not because we have not 
studied the subject, but because we have studied it — not because 
we are reckless of consequences, but because we confide in the 
principles of God's government more than in the bare assertions 
of man. The discussion of this subject will doubtless make noise, 



J 

40 

but better have the noise of argument than the shimber of guilt. 
We are sleeping upon a volcano. Let truth, therefore, go abroad, 
and awake the nation before it shall be too late. The naiion is 
beginning to awake. The wheels of a mighty moral revolution 
are beginning to roll, and they will roll on— for the hand of the 
great Friend of the oppressed is moving them. 



J. DUNHAM, PRINTER 



J„ 



HJa'l2 



^ 



